Literature DB >> 11220042

General binocular disorders: prevalence in a clinic population.

F Lara1, P Cacho, A García, R Megías.   

Abstract

The purpose of this paper was to study the prevalence of nonstrabismic accommodative and binocular dysfunctions in a clinical population. We examined 265 symptomatic patients who were chosen from an optometric clinic. We performed several tests to diagnose any form of refractive, accommodative or binocular dysfunction. Of the 265 subjects examined, 59 patients (22.3%) had some form of accommodative or binocular dysfunction and required not just the correction of the refractive error but a specific treatment for each of the problems diagnosed. The remaining subjects were classed as having refractive anomalies. The frequency of binocular dysfunctions was 12.9%, and 9.4% for accommodative anomalies. Convergence excess (4.5%) was more prevalent than convergence insufficiency (0.8%) and accommodative excess (6.4%) more prevalent than accommodative insufficiency (3%).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11220042     DOI: 10.1046/j.1475-1313.2001.00540.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ophthalmic Physiol Opt        ISSN: 0275-5408            Impact factor:   3.117


  28 in total

1.  The effectiveness of disc synoptoscope on patients with abnormal binocular vision: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Jianglan Wang; Xin Ma; Ye Wu; Meng Liao; Longqian Liu
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-10-21       Impact factor: 2.031

2.  Effects of wearing yellow spectacles on visual skills, reading speed, and visual symptoms in children with reading difficulties.

Authors:  Catalina Palomo-Álvarez; María C Puell
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-09-26       Impact factor: 3.117

3.  Contact lenses vs spectacles in myopes: is there any difference in accommodative and binocular function?

Authors:  Raimundo Jiménez; Loreto Martínez-Almeida; Carlos Salas; Carolina Ortíz
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2010-11-23       Impact factor: 3.117

Review 4.  Symptomatology associated with accommodative and binocular vision anomalies.

Authors:  Ángel García-Muñoz; Stela Carbonell-Bonete; Pilar Cacho-Martínez
Journal:  J Optom       Date:  2014-07-15

Review 5.  Is there any evidence for the validity of diagnostic criteria used for accommodative and nonstrabismic binocular dysfunctions?

Authors:  Pilar Cacho-Martínez; Ángel García-Muñoz; María Teresa Ruiz-Cantero
Journal:  J Optom       Date:  2013-03-09

6.  Concurrent vision dysfunctions in convergence insufficiency with traumatic brain injury.

Authors:  Tara L Alvarez; Eun H Kim; Vincent R Vicci; Sunil K Dhar; Bharat B Biswal; A M Barrett
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 1.973

7.  Convergence insufficiency symptom survey (CISS) scores are predictive of severity and number of clinical signs of convergence insufficiency in young adult Africans.

Authors:  Charles Darko-Takyi; Andrew Owusu-Ansah; Frank Boampong; Enyam Komla Morny; Francisca Hammond; Stephen Ocansey
Journal:  J Optom       Date:  2021-10-18

8.  Characterization of Visual Symptomatology Associated with Refractive, Accommodative, and Binocular Anomalies.

Authors:  Pilar Cacho-Martínez; Mario Cantó-Cerdán; Stela Carbonell-Bonete; Ángel García-Muñoz
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-08-16       Impact factor: 1.909

9.  Feasibility of optical quality analysis system for the objective assessment of accommodation insufficiency: a phase 1 study.

Authors:  Esther López-Artero; Nuria Garzón; Manuel Rodríguez-Vallejo; María García-Montero
Journal:  J Optom       Date:  2020-08-12

10.  Accommodative Response in Patients with Central Field Loss: A Matched Case-Control Study.

Authors:  Ali Mazyed Alsaqr; Hisham AlShareef; Faisal Alhajri; Ali Abusharha; Raied Fagehi; Ahmad Alharbi; Saud Alanazi
Journal:  Vision (Basel)       Date:  2021-07-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.